This is a proposal for a replacement for R5.1 in the draft report. To recap, R5.1 asked for an investigation of anomalous ARS compliance actions. Based on the discussion that Susan and I had with ICANN Contractual Compliance, we still do not FULLY understand the issues but we are sufficiently comfortable that we do not believe there is any merit in keeping the recommendation as written. We had two discussions, one on Monday morning (before Stephanie had arrived) and a second one on Tuesday afternoon. The conclusions for both were roughly comparable. My summaries were: "Okay. So a recommendation saying we must have some level of contactability/accuracy monitoring, [give us a] high level of confidence in the data. And the issue that we have to put on hold somewhere further is resourcing of Compliance if necessary." (Page 95 of https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/90773039/rds-plenary-43-f2f...) "At this stage the recommendation is being withdrawn. The replacement recommendation will reiterate the need for continuing diligence regarding accuracy and we will be recommending that the ARS or something comparable be continued." (2:23 of https://participate.icann.org/p3nv3p6irnk) I also note that during the discussion, the issue of contactability vs accuracy was brought up with some RT members feeling that the former was a better measure and perhaps easier to achieve (not all RT members agreed). I propose: 1. We adjust the report section to reflect the overall results of the ARS results to date, removing undue reference to the "anomalous" results we flagged in the draft report but keeping the clear statement that there were still significant accuracy issues being detected. If it does not already reflect it, it should make it clear that the ARS was suspended due to the Temp Spec. and its continued use is contingent of appropriate EPDP actions to sanction such processing. 2. Recommendation: R5.1 The Accuracy Reporting System, which was instituted to address concerns regarding RDS (WHOIS) contact data accuracy has demonstrated that there is still an accuracy concern and therefore such monitoring must continue. ICANN Org should continue to monitor accuracy and/or contactability through either the ARS or a comparable tool/methodology. This recommendation is in line with the conclusion drawn to both discussions and there was no objections raised at the time. I further note that we had planned to return and include a recommendation on Contractual Compliance resourcing. If we wish to do this, here is a proposed recommendation CM.3 The ICANN Board should take steps to ensure that ICANN Contractual Compliance is adequately resourced factoring in any increase in workload due to additional work required due to compliance with GDPR or other legislation/regulation. Both will be discussed on the RT meeting tomorrow Alan